this work, political discourse has gotten so shrill and cynical in this country that we are practically shouting across each other. there is something about watching a story that is 25 hundred years old about human suffering, the consequences of war that creates an even playing field where we can relate to each other no matter our beliefs, ideologies on the human level and have a discussion where we hear each other check bank is a rare experience. guest: it is why they are so powerful. they cut across and they have naked, raw truth. you hear elizabeth marvel doing them, and who cannot feel something from the opportunity to talk about this like this. because these things are incredibly powerful. the whole idea is very effective. and million other ways to do this stuff and hopefully just one of them will generate more

conversation. theater of war is the name of the book and the play as well. thank you for joining us this morning. that concludes our show for today. you can join us tomorrow where "washington journal" will discuss homeland security and the fight against isis and whether or not the millennial's believe the american dream is dead. we will also discuss the state of education in america. we will see you then. ♪ [inaudible] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] ♪ >> next on "newsmakers," steny

hoyer. after that, talks with the palestinians and the future of israel. click this week on "newsmakers," steny hoyer. in studio, we have with us john with the congressional euro and awith politico congressional reporter with the associated press. first question. erica: thank you. can you fill us in on the state of play and where things stand and when you expect to get a deal? hoyer: funded until wednesday, there is great

hope that over the weekend, a and that by reached wednesday, we will be able to consider a bill that has enough votes for it to pass. the fact of the matter is, we are not there yet. a lot of negotiations are going on. discussion, there are still some money issues. asy are not as controversial the writer issue is are the work has been done for some weeks be or we have not gotten to where we need to be. hopefully the republican majority will understand what the bills are about, appropriating the resources to run our government at the appropriate level. the appropriations committee has worked on all of these bills. but the writers are complicating. they are not necessary for government to operate.

they are political issues on which the party have real differences. include those in these considerations but they obviously are being included. ask you about one of the policy provisions democrats are pushing. -- the ban on gun violence. you have insisted this should be included in the omnibus package. i think you mean not included. >> right. ending the ban. can you talk about why this is important and how many votes would this pickup for democrats? rep. hoyer: this is something that has been in the appropriations committee for a long time now. in the appropriation bills. it is not new but it does not make sense.

it says you cannot even research the impact of guns on the health of our nation. the democrats, that doesn't make sense. we are working hard to have that deleted. the sponsor of that writer, congressman dickey from arkansas, who is no longer in congress, said that probably should not be maintained. that is certainly one of the riders that is of concern to us. >> is that something that is a redline for democrats? we think it ought toer: be removed. i do not want to put too many red lines on the bill. i think it would be important for democrats. i do not want to call it a redline.

>> how many votes does it pick up from democrats? the overall bill, if it is successful to us, i think you will get significant numbers for the omnibus as we have in the past. the question really is how many republicans will vote for the omnibus the matter what is in there. >> republicans are pushing to lift the ban on exports. is that something willing to live for if you get your priority on energy and other things in there? rep. hoyer: discussions with leader pelosi and on the senate issue weell, this would infer is not in the bill, a very large majority of democrats voting against it. if in fact we could resolve some

of the other issues we feel strongly about, including the alternative energy issues and the extension of tax credits for alternative energy, i think this is not something that could not be resolved with republicans getting something they want and we give something we want. that is the process of negotiations, the appropriations process and the legislative process generally. certainly a lot of robust thatssions surrounding issue. if we include that, a provision , as we haverovide as we haveska, or the american maritime industry shipved, that could help holding in america, could help ,ur national security program

in place, which, in effect, in payments going through the industry to make sure we have ships that could take material that the armed forces needs transported, it is good for national security. towill agree -- if we were agree to the oil program. >> being pushed by senator mcconnell, the latest finance lifting limits, certain spending limits by the finance campaign committee is that something you're are willing to live with? rep. hoyer: i do not want to say we can live with it here last year, we passed the -- that had . substantial increase in money we believe those ought to be considered on their own merits

or demerits. we believe there is too much money in politics and that it is eroding the integrity of the system. the intent of this is to andngthen the parties weaken independent expenditures per that is a worthwhile agenda but it ought to be in a separate bill. >> can you talk generally about how you see next week playing timing?ar as you have a $1.1 trillion omnibus package. calculus.t political how does this play out on the floor next week? in your mind? there are two

separate issues, and one is about funding the government to serve the american people and defend our country. we need to pass that. it is a must pass. the other is not a must pass. they did a two-year extension. i am not for the $750 bill being discussed. i think it makes thinkficit worse, and i undermines the ability to get a comp has of tax reform. i think most democrats agree with that and most republicans do. ofo from the standpoint funding the government, it substantially undermines so-called congressional area spending, spending on national security and education,

infrastructure and other items which help grow our economy. the probability is we're going , but iftuesday at 6:30 we have completed negotiations over the weekend, my expectation is it would probably be a session. we will not be voting, the house will go into session for a short time, and whatever agreement is reached will be filed. reason monday is important is that gives republicans, because it may be as few as 26 hours, but three days here at a monday, a tuesday, and they went they, to consider and pass an omnibus appropriations bill, as well as a tax extender bill if that is fired at that -- filed at that point in time. suspensions on tuesday.

but the big day, if in fact we an agreement have and republicans think they have the votes, they will consider -- tax extender bill and the appropriations bill, the omnibus appropriations bill. to the senateo and ken ipass at wednesday or do they need another short-term continuing resolution? rep. hoyer: assuming we have agreement, assuming all have signed off on what the agreement on wednesday.ass there may be a need for another short-term friday. there to bexpect another short-term funding bill. i hope he is right on that the

way to get it done is to make sure to do it on the appropriation omnibus bill, bipartisan agreement. and that we do not try to force on the other side something they don't want and cannot vote for, in which case we would have trouble getting a majority. almost always, in most instances, when we pass the appropriations bill for -- to fund the government, even though their leadership was asking them billse for these funding -- eep the government open, notwithstanding that, mr. ryan said he would follow the rule which says you have to get a majority. i think he is very interested in doing that. whether or not he can do that will be interesting to see.

>> you talked about speaker ryan. can you describe your relationship with him? the house? tone of you had a very good relationship with the former speaker banner. you are emotional when he left verity made a very strong speech on the floor. talk about what it means and what is different since he became speaker? rep. hoyer: it has been a short time. i cannot make it in depth analysis. time will tell. paul ryan is very bright and very able. calls himself a movement conservatives, which means he is , and although both he and speaker banner are i think ites, accurate to say mr. ryan is more ideological whether or not that will provide the stability the leader needs to make the kinds of compromises that are obviously necessary in order for

us to move forward in an effective way, we will see. happen had good things over the last two weeks. we pass an education bill in a bipartisan fashion, largely done while speaker banner -- speaker boehner was speaker. while not perfect, a bipartisan agreement. overwhelmingly bipartisan support. we passed and affected the reauthorization of the export import bank, which i was very involved with. republican members. we did that in an overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion. we have shown in recent weeks that we could make very positive steps forward in a bipartisan way. we're still having trouble getting there now on the omnibus and the stick -- the spenders

tax bill. we will see whether mr. ryan can leadnext 96 hours his caucus to come to a bipartisan agreement with us. we are prepared to do that as we have demonstrated over the last month. hopefully, that will happen. one of the things i am somewhat concerned about is the faction of the republican party that has hasted gridlock which , thinksed the speaker mr. ryan is doing a pretty good job. he will agreeans with them more, which will make bipartisan agreement tougher, or that he has included them in discussions and that is positive. erica: is there anything

different about the outcome, the product, then if speed -- speaker banner would have an outcome that funds planned parenthood? obama cut in all likelihood -- obamacare in all likelihood is not -- on refugees. what is the likelihood? get along pretty well with paul ryan. i have respect for him. i think he is very bright and able. tried to get things done with him in the past. we have not been able to affect in terms of fiscally responsible path for the country to get on. notwithstanding that, we have had good conversations immediately before he became speaker and since. i look forward to working with him hopefully in a bipartisan way. from your standpoint, as you think some will

say that substantively, there is not a great deal of difference. it may be more stylistic and the reason is in order to get something done, particularly at a time when you do not have the unanimous republican or at least two other 18 republicans to agree on something, then you have got to work across the aisle. if you do, you will come up with a product similar to what banner did when he found himself in order to move the business of america forward, not just that this this -- but the business of the country forward. he had to work across the aisle to come up with a bipartisan product. next week, it will be a bipartisan product. talk we would like to about 2016. our would like to get your thoughts of donald trump, he seems to be leaving -- leading all the republican old. what does it say about the

republican party? rep. hoyer: first of all, it is not just trump. but you have the senator from texas, senator cruz, ben carson, in the mix of those who are obviously representing the more conservative, antigovernment, disaffected, angry fashion of the party. when you add 50% their votes together in the polling numbers -- at least the polling numbers together. what it says is they clearly have opted to represent the anti-unity party of trying to bring the country together, who prefer competition and prefer an senator cruz said repeatedly, not to compromise, not to try to get to an agreement, but to stand even if it means shutting down

government for propositions that do not enjoy the majority support of congress of the united states. and i would argue nor of the american people. i think what it says about the republican party now is they are ways, is that, in many not interested in constructively the other side or people who differ with them on the issues because they are so absolutely certain of the rightness of the positions they have taken. democracy does not work that way. you have not to come to consensus and you do that through discussion and compromise. people do that in their families and businesses and communities and it is something we need to do in congress. a lot of establishment republicans look at trump in horror about what would be the

outcome if he were to be the nominee. do you look at it the other way and saying that case, a chance at taking back the house would be a really tough time? rep. hoyer: i think it will be a tough time but i think it is possible we can take the house back. with over without trump. but if trump is the head of the ticket, i think it will be pretty dramatic evidence for the american people that the party thatparty is a is more negative than positive, seeking, ands frankly in many respects was -- irresponsible in its rhetoric if trump becomes their representative. john: you have already thrown your support behind hillary clinton. you have endorsed her and even had a fundraiser for her. can you tell us why? you came out so early for her. what will she bring to the table

that will help her in 2016? theonly with winning nomination but with winning the presidency? has great: she ability, great intellect, great political skills, and great experience. i think no one in the race has the experience hillary has either on the republican side or the democratic side. she has been, as first lady in country,and of our first for a long time, seeing both state and federal government operate from up close and personal. electability her by being elected to the united and then showing herself to be a very effective member of the united they senate, and effective legislator

, working across the aisle. i think she has unmatched .xperience and capability as secretary of state, she has of thed of knowledge international community of the challenges confronting the united states that i think we need. in particular, the numbers have an very pointed in her commitment to making sure that america and americans are safe and secure and that we confront effective and an robust way and achieve our objectives. behink america will comfortable with her as commander-in-chief as well as .resident of the united states i not only endorsed her early but i'm enthusiastic about her candidacy and am convinced she will win and be president of the united states.

could you talk a little bit about the relationship between congressional democrats and the president at this point? we have seen concerns about the strategy toward isis, concerns about the syrian refugee approach. our democrats -- are democrats abandoning a lame-duck resident at this? certainly do not think the democrats are abandoning president obama. he has had an extraordinary record. when you look at the economic situation when he became the president of the united states, he has turned it around. i would say democrats were very helpful to him as majority leader in 2009 at 2000 10, worked closely with the president and leader pelosi and leader reid. has had a successful, anyway you look at the economy, whether the value of the stock market, it has really turned the economy around.

we can do more, but on the hadrnational level, he has one of the most complex and difficult situations in the middle east and around the world that i have seen since i have been in congress in my 35th year. the middle east in particular is as complex and chaotic and difficult to manage as i have seen it. ourthere some members of caucus, including myself, who have indicated we need to have in many ways a more robust engagement in syria and iraq? are other differences of opinion? there are. but there were great differences between republicans and george bush when he was president and between democrats and bill clinton when he was president. that is normal to occur.

the bottom line is nobody's abandoning president obama on our side of the aisle to we work closely with him. sometimes we agree and sometimes we don't. i think we have seen in the overwhelming number of its and sis, there has been agreement moving the country forward both on the domestic side and the international side. a worthwhile and important debate that continues to go on about what our best strategies are domestically and internationally. you in particular were concerned about the iran agreement. you are a long time supporter of israel. there is a lot of devices rhetoric on that. has there been any attempt to do outreach on that? yes, i have talked , denniss, the president

being the chief of staff, about these issues. and i made it very clear i ended up voting for the agreement because i thought voting against the agreement would not make things any better. it would not have been the agreement i would have negotiated. it was the agreement that was reached and it was supported by all the nations that were parties as well as the united nations. so we are moving forward but i think we need to move forward very carefully. surenk we need to make iran is meeting its obligations. i was disappointed and distressed that iran, in violation of you and sanctions past few just in the ands, clearly in violation i issued a strong statement on the issue and i urge the administration to do so as well.

differencesre were and strong feelings, we need to in making sure iran not only follows the agreement made with respect to nuclear is confronted and to meet its obligations under international law and that this red of terrorism and stop funding terrorism and participating in supporting terrorists not only in the middle east but in other parts of the world. we need to be pointed and vigorous in our oversight of and, whenvity warranted, confront the activity to stop it. erica: obviously, we could talk to you about a lot more topics and we are out of time. thank you so much. rep. hoyer: good to be with you. let me turn to the two of you

and set up this week coming up. how do we even get to the place where at the end of the year, lawmakers are trying to debate and negotiate a $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill? that is an interesting question. one thing we have heard from paul ryan repeatedly is that it would be different next year. we will see of that comes to pass. this is the way things have gone in recent history. the reason we had to pass a short-term bill on friday is because the short-term bill before that had expired. one short-term spending bill after the other. many members of both parties say it is not the way to do business and we will see if that can change in the next fiscal year. >> republicans need democrats to vote on the spending bill. it sounds like democrats have some leverage on this. they have leveraged pair

they oh have leverage on spending bills. this is for republicans, this is a tough vote. traditionally, they have has a lot of conservatives who don't want to increase spending. this package will increase spending. on both domestic and defense spending. democrats, and gives nancy pelosi and senator reid and the white house a lot more leverage, so they had been pushing pretty hard on this. it is interesting when you have the two tracks, the tax extender on one side and on the bus on the other. mnibus on the other.

>> does this set a tone for next year for the new speaker of the house? >> i think that remains to be seen as we were discussing with hoyer. it is not going to look all that different from what would have come up under former speaker boehner who was pushed out. at least, speaker ryan has been able to keep them in the fold. he has them eating out of his hand. it is quite fascinating. one of the reasons is a cousin of his promises that next year will be different. if you doesn't deliver on that, all bets were off. john: the tone of the house is completely different.

it is like members looked into the offense after boehner and mccarthy. mccarthy had to withdraw from the speaker race. on the republican side, they were looking at chaos, potentially. he was smart on how he handled his ascension to speaker. said, guys, this is what we need to do. i am only going to do with if you back me up. we are still playing john boehner cost and. boehner's hand. this is his legacy. next year, ryan will have a blank slate. he has to play out the cards that boehner gave him. he was lucky to get them. boehner did have a big favor on the debt ceiling.

a good position to give -- get him a budget agreement. he is going to have to work with the president, democrats in the house, senate, this is a test for ryan. he is probably able to do it. yer, the next 96 hours will be a good obamacare -- barometer. thank you both for being a part of newsmakers. >> he was just an authentic person. i always thought there was a great story. she became the first modern first lady, she had a big staff, very important project, she